Forum:New Things
I think we need to discuss a few things so here they are: More Emoticons Would it be ok if I added all of the champion squares to the emoticons? Basically I would just use the champion squares and they emote code in chat would be something like (Akali) and a little emoticon of akali's champion square would appear. 05:17, 12/5/2011 ;Support # It's not that big of a deal. 05:17, 12/5/2011 # as long as they don't cause lag and aren't obnoxiously large, you can add all the emoticons you want ;Neutral # ;Oppose # ;Comments * question before my vote is cast would this lag the chat at all? priority for the chat is no lag everything else is just icing on the cake. 15:25, December 5, 2011 (UTC) **Nope, no lag whatsoever. That's the main reason they were re-enabled. Wikia fixed it about 1 month ago or somewhere around that time. 01:26, 12/6/2011 Voting Eligibility Shouldn't we have some time of rules for people voting on nominations. Here is what I have though of so far: Signature is required, votes may not be biased, account is required (no anons since anyone could just sign out and basically vote twice), you must be active at least 1 every 2 days, users should also have at least have 10 edits before voting. 05:17, 12/5/2011 ;Support # I agree with these regulations. 05:17, 12/5/2011 # I agree with these regulations, but with the added condition that those 10 edits have to be main-space edits. LionsLight 15:58, December 5, 2011 (UTC) ;Neutral # i agree on most points except active every one to two days sometimes good users cant get on consistently but they will have a day every few days to really work. if we could possibly change that portion ill change my vote :) 15:27, December 5, 2011 (UTC) # I do agree that minimal identity and reliability would be required to at least qualify for the nomination, and 10 mainspace edits would be sufficient, however for the activity wise, some of us have our own commitments (Job wise, school wise,whichever is necessary in our life) that we cannot forsake. I'm leaning to a yes if activity period is extended to at least once every 3~4 days perhaps? Situational, of course. Lesanthosxia ❦零亜のレスサントスシア❦ 16:08, December 5, 2011 (UTC) ;Oppose # generally vague rules and the activity requirement is too high # , since bureaucrats don't judge anything based on solely numbers, but rather the quality of the arguments presented on both sides. 17:22, December 5, 2011 (UTC) # I think an account should be required, sure, but I doubt we're getting Anons in on votes anyhow. But I agree with Boty Dysry and AJR here, the focus should be on the votes and quality thereof, not the activity-level of the voters. --Constantly Confuddled Sth 23:21, December 5, 2011 (UTC) # What Aj said 01:32, December 6, 2011 (UTC) # , What AJ said. [[User:Paul Levesque|'Paul Levesque']] [[User talk:Paul Levesque|'Talk to Me!']] 10:30, December 7, 2011 (UTC) ;Comments *